I'm wondering why this title. Out of the hundreds of existing remakes and thousands yet to happen, was this ever on anyone's radar? I'd rather see Nekromantik remade than this, and Wood just doesn't fit no matter how creepy Kevin was in Sin City. In the sad history of bad ideas, this has a great seat near the top from what I can imagine will come of it.

Maybe/hopefully it's really just the name only they are taking. A reamke won't work, a new story with a similar feel and title could. I'll wait to say if I want to see it until after we find out what gets made.

Yeah, the Nightmare remake is the one that did it for me. When they remade Freddy, that pretty much made me give up and say "Remakes are here to stay, no matter how much we whine." So, while I don't exactly embrace them, I've come to terms with them. I still think they are an incredible waste of money and shows how dire Hollywood is in need of fresh ideas and creativity. But at the end of the day, if a studio thinks they can make more money on a remake of a forgotten 70s mini-classic than they will an original film like The Rite or My Soul To Take, they will remake whatever they can.

And yes, remakes do introduce new audiences to the original films through new DVD releases. Imagine how many people were duped into buying the original My Bloody Valentine when the new one came out, just because the special edition DVD was already on Walmart shelves. To me, that's a big win for the original film. Hell... there's no way we would've even got to SEE the uncut director's cut of My Bloody Valentine, had it not been for the remake. Paramount wasn't going to do squat for it. It sure wouldn't have gotten that kind of mainstream distribution in this day and age, had it not been for the remake. Same for Black Christmas. That movie, like MBV, was known only to die-hard horror fans, before the remake.

And just this past October, I saw the ORIGINAL Hills Have Eyes for sale at Walmart. If not for the remake, I highly doubt that would've been part of the October promotion.

Along the same lines... I didn't even get all that upset when they Twiligh-ified the new DVD cover for Near Dark. Because if some poor brooding emo sap is gonna sob and cut himself to a vampire flick, Near Dark is a much better choice. I hope a lot of people bought it and were fooled into thinking it was some kind of Twilight-esque flick. Quite brilliant, if you ask me.

Forget not "looking like a killer," Wood doesn't even look Italian. I'm predicting the character won't even be named "Frank Zito." They're going a completely different route with this, and I'm fine with that. A remake shouldn't be an imitation; remember Psycho?

So because he doesn't have a book to base his performance on, he can't make it work? I don't buy that. In fact, I think that may make him even better in the role, since there are a few directions he could go with the character.

Dude...how on Earth did you get that out of what I wrote? The statement I made was in regards to you implying that because Wood played Kevin in Sin City, he has the credence to play a character as sick and vile as Frank Zito. The two are completely irrelevant as far as I'm concerned.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarkWarner

And not all serial killers are like Frank Zito. Many have been charming, unassuming types, and I'm willing to bet the people behind this film are aware of that (hence this casting decision). Frank Zito is the cliche, so I think it would be pretty refreshing to see someone like Wood playing a killer for once.

Haha...Frank Zito is the cliche. Wow. Exactly right...seeing as most slasher movies being made at that time were of overweight Italians living in a slum in the middle of New York City...afraid not. Maniac broke the mold of the masked slasher stalking teenagers in the woods or suburbia and instead brought the ugliness and seediness of the big city streets.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarkWarner

If its sole purpose is to disgust, then why the outrage over remaking it?

Read my second post. I have no issues with Maniac being remade. However, I do have an issue with the casting decision. I also have an issue with people downgrading the original. I understand its your opinion, but for Christ's sake give credit where credit is do. Its a great flick, with great performances and is a top tier slasher flick in my book.

Dude...how on Earth did you get that out of what I wrote? The statement I made was in regards to you implying that because Wood played Kevin in Sin City, he has the credence to play a character as sick and vile as Frank Zito. The two are completely irrelevant as far as I'm concerned.

How so? I mean, we're all basing our opinions on how he might do on what he's done before. I just happen to be basing it on stuff that's more relevant to what he's going to be playing.

Quote:

Haha...Frank Zito is the cliche. Wow. Exactly right...seeing as most slasher movies being made at that time were of overweight Italians living in a slum in the middle of New York City...afraid not. Maniac broke the mold of the masked slasher stalking teenagers in the woods or suburbia and instead brought the ugliness and seediness of the big city streets.

I wasn't referring just to films. I'm talking about the general cliche of killers being big, nasty, burly guys. He may have not been a Freddy or a Jason, but Frank Zito was still a cliche in terms of how we perceive what a real serial killer is like.

Quote:

Read my second post. I have no issues with Maniac being remade. However, I do have an issue with the casting decision. I also have an issue with people downgrading the original. I understand its your opinion, but for Christ's sake give credit where credit is do. Its a great flick, with great performances and is a top tier slasher flick in my book.

I did give credit where I felt it was due (Savini's effects work). That's about all the credit I'm willing to give the film though.

I just heard an radio interview with Elijah Wood and he talked about the film.

He said that he is usually against remakes, but the concept is totally different & figured it was quite a interesting role to take. He said the entire movie is shot in POV, and that his character is only revealed in reflections.

I just heard an radio interview with Elijah Wood and he talked about the film.

He said that he is usually against remakes, but the concept is totally different & figured it was quite a interesting role to take. He said the entire movie is shot in POV, and that his character is only revealed in reflections.

I just heard an radio interview with Elijah Wood and he talked about the film.

He said that he is usually against remakes, but the concept is totally different & figured it was quite a interesting role to take. He said the entire movie is shot in POV, and that his character is only revealed in reflections.

A character who looks like Elijah Wood is far creepier to me than one who looks like Frank Zito. Because --you know what?--I know enough to stay away from someone who looks like Frank Zito. I won't ever be in a situation when I am close enough to Zito to have him stab me or kidnap me or whatever. No way. I'll just cross the street,

Someone who looks like Elijah Wood, however? Not threatening at all in appearance. And that's why guys like Dahmer are so "successful" at doing the horrible things they do. They are unassuming. It's terrifying when they reveal their true selves.

I don't see a problem with switching up the perception of the killer in the role. I don't want to watch the same maniac/"Maniac" again.

I hated Maniac, on many levels, but I just didn't buy an unattractive man and a beautiful woman together. The only time that happens is when you're a rock star, a sports star or you've otherwise got boatloads of cash. For that reason, I could almost believe Elijah Wood, he's not terribly good looking, but he's not that ugly either.

But I do add the disclaimer that I have enjoyed a number of remakes over the last 10 years or so, and some of them more so than the originals. Still, about 90% of them are big streaming piles of crap, so maybe that isn't saying a whole lot.

Someone who looks like Elijah Wood, however? Not threatening at all in appearance. And that's why guys like Dahmer are so "successful" at doing the horrible things they do.

Dahmer was also 6' 1" and weighed 190lb.

Quote:

Originally Posted by startide

I hated Maniac, on many levels, but I just didn't buy an unattractive man and a beautiful woman together. The only time that happens is when you're a rock star, a sports star or you've otherwise got boatloads of cash. For that reason, I could almost believe Elijah Wood, he's not terribly good looking, but he's not that ugly either.

The only reason for the "relationship" between Frank Zito and Anna was because Lustig thought Caroline Munro was hot and wanted her to be in the movie longer. Sure it isn't believable, but it was never meant to be... it was just great eye candy for the viewer. You can thank Mr. Lustig for that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by baggio

Well after all this talk about the remake here is some news.

I just heard an radio interview with Elijah Wood and he talked about the film.

He said that he is usually against remakes, but the concept is totally different & figured it was quite a interesting role to take. He said the entire movie is shot in POV, and that his character is only revealed in reflections.

Discuss

And there's terrible decision #2. A POV movie...filled with shaky cam and quick shots to give it the "found footage" vibe the kids are raging about these days...junk.

More than likely a promising premise turned into the latest zero thrills, no balls flash in the pan remake courtesy of brainless movie execs.